Achieving Accountability Through Decentralization: Lessons for Integrated River Basin Management
While decentralization holds out the promise of increased flexibility and efficiency, the preconditions for realizing it are daunting. To draw lessons for productive decentralization in integrated river basin management, this paper surveys the dece...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Policy Research Working Paper |
Language: | English en_US |
Published: |
World Bank, Washington, D.C.
2013
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2004/06/4965735/achieving-accountability-through-decentralization-lessons-integrated-river-basin-management http://hdl.handle.net/10986/14045 |
Summary: | While decentralization holds out the
promise of increased flexibility and efficiency, the
preconditions for realizing it are daunting. To draw lessons
for productive decentralization in integrated river basin
management, this paper surveys the decentralization
experience in education, health care, roads, irrigation, and
public infrastructure services. Case studies reveal that the
prime focus in the design of a decentralized structure must
be accountability, based on principles of subsidiarity,
transparency, and allocation of property rights. While some
debates are sector-specific, others, such as the need for
political and financial accountability, the related data
requirements, educating stakeholders and potential
beneficiaries of the new system, and ensuring effective
participation are true of decentralization wherever it is to
unfold. In turn, initial conditions and the adaptation of
political leadership to suit the historical context
determine the success of decentralization. Four issues
demand high priority in integrated river basin management.
These are (1) overcoming financial inadequacy at the local
level; (2) commitment to upgrading skills, particularly
management skills, while also ensuring that the expertise
accumulated in central bureaucracies is not dissipated; (3)
assuring pre-reform beneficiaries that their rights would be
protected; and (4) sustaining a long-term commitment to an
inevitably slow and drawn out decentralization process. The
main conclusions of the literature survey caution those who
believe that decentralization is, in itself, a solution to
problems of inefficiency and inequity in developing
countries. Tradeoffs and tensions need to be reconciled
(such as economies of scale versus local monitoring and
integrated management or interregional equity versus local control). |
---|